#121
Post rating: ~
#122
Post rating: ~
n/m

Edited by RedMaistre ()

#123
Online
Post rating: +
#124
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +
#125
Post rating: +

cars posted:

like all former rhizzone posters, real subtle is now very famous online.



Oh, former! I've been screwing this up pretty bad...

#126
[account deactivated]
#127
Post rating: +
it's a shit article (he can't help but start with a reference to "stalin's gulags" right up front) but everyone has misread the victims of communism reference somewhat because it's in a paragraph of examples of right wingers freaking out about a resurgence of socialist sentiment among young people. i mean, even referencing them without mocking and/or explicitly denouncing them is bad, but that crypto cuttlefish tweet is dumb
#128
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~

Petrol posted:

it's a shit article (he can't help but start with a reference to "stalin's gulags" right up front) but everyone has misread the victims of communism reference somewhat because it's in a paragraph of examples of right wingers freaking out about a resurgence of socialist sentiment among young people. i mean, even referencing them without mocking and/or explicitly denouncing them is bad, but that crypto cuttlefish tweet is dumb



yeah

#129
Post rating: ~
eeyup
#130
[account deactivated]
#131
Post rating: +
the only words i managed to read were "we need a return to the second international" before i comically fell off my chair
#132
Post rating: +++++
Well in that case let me tell you: the next words were "house of pancakes"
#133
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +

glomper_stomper posted:

considering the article is a flagrant apology to cold warriors on behalf of the current generation of "democratic socialists", i think there's more to it than just some uncritical acceptance of victims of communism as anything more than a neo-nazi front.



i think someone read a pretty bad article and got primed to misread a sentence in it as worse than it really is

#134
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +
Consider the audience who reads the NYT out of a desire to be informed. How would they know that Sunkara is not either in agreement with VoCMF, or treating it "neutrally" as legitimate group with legitimate concerns? When in reality it's the worst kind of revisionist scum, at the direct service of the modern neo-Nazi movement. Sunkara agrees that communism had all these victims, otherwise they'd have posted a source that was awful on its face like Stormfront, or have noted that VoCMF posts grotesque lies. It shows that Sunkara, head of the social democrats, either has not read enough to understand why the VoCMF is bullshit, or knows and doesn't care.
#135
Post rating: ~

cars posted:

i think someone read a pretty bad article and got primed to misread a sentence in it as worse than it really is


i dont see anything there that suggests that sunkara sees VoC as anything beyond a presumably respectable right wing source, which he is perfectly fine with engaging with in good faith

e: to be clear, i dont think the VoC passage is particularly worse than the opening thing about gulags

Edited by c_man ()

#136
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +
in context of even the other sentence in that screen capture it's clear he's not endorsing it as anything but an example of paranoid pearl-clutching on the right but i'm not going to spend any more energy defending a bad red-baiting article by a guy i don't like at all as a writer or Twitter man
#137
Post rating: +

swampman posted:

Consider the audience who reads the NYT out of a desire to be informed.


#138
Post rating: ~

swampman posted:

Consider the audience who reads the NYT out of a desire to be informed. How would they know that Sunkara is not either in agreement with VoCMF, or treating it "neutrally" as legitimate group with legitimate concerns? When in reality it's the worst kind of revisionist scum, at the direct service of the modern neo-Nazi movement. Sunkara agrees that communism had all these victims, otherwise they'd have posted a source that was awful on its face like Stormfront, or have noted that VoCMF posts grotesque lies. It shows that Sunkara, head of the social democrats, either has not read enough to understand why the VoCMF is bullshit, or knows and doesn't care.


i mean, i agree, but it's not like NYT op-eds get published without going through a bunch of editors, and at the risk of defending him even more, it's quite possible he contextualised the VoC reference and it got cut out. the best option, of course, would be to have never mentioned them at all, but sunkara is at best a big dingus

#139
Post rating: +
we need a lot more Victims of Communism
#140
[account deactivated]
#141
Post rating: ~

Petrol posted:

i mean, i agree, but it's not like NYT op-eds get published without going through a bunch of editors, and at the risk of defending him even more, it's quite possible he contextualised the VoC reference and it got cut out. the best option, of course, would be to have never mentioned them at all, but sunkara is at best a big dingus


i think the best option might be to not publish in the NYT at all

#142
[account deactivated]
#143
[account deactivated]
#144
[account deactivated]
#145
Post rating: +

c_man posted:

i think the best option might be to not publish in the NYT at all


#146
Post rating: ~

AZ_IZ_OT posted:

Look like an absolute dumbass trying to get free press from vultures while preserving enough cash to manage your own flock of moron children


awww now i've got that warm fuzzy nostalgia feeling

#147
Deus Ex Machinist
Post rating: +
tangent - if anyone's into the excruciatingly prolonged death of journalism, here are excerpts from a letter by the copy editors of NYT to their boss:

We have begun the humiliating process of justifying our continued presence at The New York Times. We take some solace in the fact that we have been assured repeatedly that copy editors are highly respected here.

But after living more than a year and a half under a cloud of uncertainty about our jobs, a cruelly drawn-out period in which we suspended major financial arrangements and life decisions, and carried an ever-growing kernel of fear;
After we were compared to dogs urinating on fire hydrants when we edited stories, in an internal report that called for the elimination of "low-value editing" and made it all but clear which stages of editing this referred to — so much so that it became a running joke among the copy desks for months ("How's the low-value editing going in your section today?") — along with the report's implication that copy editing was merely finding "easily identifiable errors, such as spelling and grammar mistakes";
After some of us were recruited for "editing tests" to streamline the process, or, as it turned out, figure out how to make our own jobs obsolete;
After enduring a newsroom-wide copy-editing overhaul last year that consolidated the desks, transformed the scope of our duties and confused a whole lot of reporters and section editors (but ultimately made us think we would at least keep our jobs);
After learning that this new setup would be undone just months after it was put in place, with the whiplash announcement that our jobs would simply be eliminated;
After we were told that to remain employed, we would have to apply for new "strong editor" positions meant to be a hybrid of the two types of editors at The Times, backfielders and copy editors, and realized only copy editors had to be reevaluated categorically;
After we were told that this "restructuring" would also reduce our numbers by more than half;
After completing a first round of interviews, some held by interviewers who clearly had not even read our résumés and cover letters, and competing against the very colleagues we are leaning on in these times;
After we heard that The Times would soon go on a hiring spree, just as it gets ready to shed jobs, and thought to ourselves that it is particularly ruthless to talk about all the others you intend to court as you break up with someone;
After all of this and more — we are finding it difficult to feel respected.

#148
Post rating: +

https://jacobin.com/2022/11/mao-zedong-wang-fanxi-communist-party-china/ posted:

In the 1920s, China’s Communist Party retreated from the cities to the countryside to wage a protracted guerrilla war. This long separation from the Chinese working class fostered an autocratic culture that went on to shape the party’s rule over China.


keywords: trotskyism

#149
hi!!! : )
Post rating: +

lo posted:

https://jacobin.com/2022/11/mao-zedong-wang-fanxi-communist-party-china/ posted:

In the 1920s, China’s Communist Party retreated from the cities to the countryside to wage a protracted guerrilla war. This long separation from the Chinese working class fostered an autocratic culture that went on to shape the party’s rule over China.

keywords: trotskyism



Oh darn! If only they hadnt waged protracted guerrilla war from the countryside! Then they would have failed so, so nobly...

#150
hi!!! : )
Post rating: ~
i swear im not trying to do these double posts...
#151
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +

realsubtle posted:

i swear im not trying to do these double posts...



the site wants you to post more. Hi realsubtle and welcome back from twitter superstardom

#152
hi!!! : )
Post rating: ~

cars posted:

realsubtle posted:

i swear im not trying to do these double posts...

the site wants you to post more. Hi realsubtle and welcome back from twitter superstardom



#153
lies half the time
Post rating: ~

realsubtle posted:

i swear im not trying to do these double posts...


double post on purpose it's funny, accidently doing it.. gross

#154
lies half the time
Post rating: ~
all the best posts are double posted & there is data to back this up